Republicans: Are you still blind to the ways?

Are the Republicans who jetted back to Washington this weekend "to save Terri" not the same politicians who recently voted as a rock-solid bloc to
gut the Medicaid funding that helps pay for catastrophic medical costs incurred by the unfortunate thousands who find themselves in a similar
situation? Did they not overwhelmingly pass a devastating bankruptcy bill that will make it impossible for families who lose their life savings
to ever get back on their feet? Were they not the ones who vowed to enact tort reform that would wipe out the exact same kind of malpractice
claims that have thus kept Schiavo alive!?
Yet, as witnessed by my eyes on CSPAN, they stood, one after the other, claiming pious rightmindedness on this "issue".
Their leader in Spirit, George Bush, actually cut a vaction short to come back to the office & sign this thing.
At the same time, 6 month old Sun Hudson was removed from life support against his mother's wishes because Mr. Bush signed into law the
Texas Futile Care Law. That law gives hospitals the right to pull the plug on those "with no hope to survive" and can not
pay.

Why has your media focused more time, coverage and money on floating this "story" than on the critical legislation outlined above, or on Jeff Gannon
or on the worldwide protest to the Iraqi occupation or .......well, anything that can indenture you or kill you?

I watch C-SPAN at lunch, in my office....I learn more puzzle pieces exist....I rage, sometimes I weep, for my country.....and I wonder....how can
things ever get right ?

Democrats are dirty by their meek silence....... Republicans are locked in goosestep regardless of some knowing better......what would be opposition
from other parts is otherwised stifled in an ongoing old boy system by the Big Two........

Nice liberal talking points. Ifi gnorance is bliss, you are one happy guy.

Comparing Schiavo to Sun Hudson is truly retarted. Schiavo's parents have the money and are willing to assume responsibility for Terry. Sun Hudsons
mother had no way of paying for life support. If she had money, like schiavo's parents then she could have continued life support. No body is
responsible for somebody's medical needs.

Tort reform is ABSOLUTELY NECCESSARY. Trial lawyers are making millions of dollars (John edwards) feeding off of their victims. Many doctors
can't even practice medicine due to scumbag lawyers. How many lives are lost because doctors discontinue their practice? Nobody should have to pay
for the medical treatment of others. That is that.

Why has your media focused more time, coverage and money on floating this "story" than on the critical legislation outlined above, or on Jeff Gannon
or on the worldwide protest to the Iraqi occupation or .......well, anything that can indenture you or kill you?

Great point, Bout Time. At the risk of being called heartless, aren't there quite a few more issues that are much more pressing to the general public
RIGHT NOW than this case, like, I don't know, Bush's "plan" for Social Security, his recent budget proposal, our continuing stay in Iraq, Iran's
nuclear ambitions. While I feel for Ms. Schiavo, the vast majority will never have to deal with this kind of problem. Our government is pulling a fast
one on us taking our attention away from their plundering and lying and covering it up by pulling at our heartstrings with a matter that doesn't
desere this kind of coverage at this point and time. But then, this kind of smoke and mirrors from Bush and Co. isn't at all surprising, remember how
the "evils" of gay marriage was a much bigger issue last election than all of Bush's faults during his first term?

No, I'm not blind at all, nor am I very pleased with SOME of the things the Bush Administration is letting slide through. I am opposed to the
Administration's stance on immigration, privacy, so-called "moral" issues, and quite a few other things internal to the US. SOME things I am
pleased with however, like our foreign policy, the promised commitment to space exploration, and possible tax system, SS system, and Tort reforms.

When I voted for Bush, I was fully aware that the religious right would see his victory as a ticket to spread and enforce their dogma at will. I am
about as anti-religion as you can get and am actually counting on the left to counter the worst of the likely abuses. They are dropping the ball on
that task though, with letting this Terry Schiavo thing even get to Congress. Bad. Just Bad.

In my opinion, the need for the US to be taking the correct actions (which I think Bush has been taking) in the international arena is more important
at this time in history than not letting the far right think they are having their way for a little bit. That is pretty much why I voted the way I
did, plus the fact that I just didn't like John Kerry at all.

Let me put it this way, however. I would vote for Hillary Clinton before I would vote for Pat Robertson or Pat Buchanan, or Tom Delay for that matter.
I think you would find that many people who voted for Bush feel the same. The more the religous right take the Republican party in that direction,
just like the extreme left has taken the Democrats the other way, the more people they will lose. I have said before that the American people have
given the Republicans what they have been asking for, but now there can be no excuses and some good stuff had better get done.

I don't like some of what I see, and if it keeps up, I'll make my displeasure known in 3 1/2 years. Now that doesn't do a lot for those of you who
think the election was rigged anyway, but I can't help you there. I have no illusions about our system of government and don't for a second believe
or expect that any political party is going to match my views on everything. If it wern't for their foreign policy (or lack of one), I'd certainly
be a Libertarian.

That was a very honest post and I like it, we have issues now that are very important to every American.

Right now, as I was watching the news on our economy, experts has come to the conclusion that we have a worst terror to fight in our own soil with our
own economy and is becoming worst than a prospect of a terrorist attack and is our deficit, not only our trading deficit but our national debt.

The interest rates are to be raised again. We need to find solution for our domestics problems and it has to be done soon, because is not longer ones
side or the other is all of us hard working americans the ones to be affected all of us.

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
When I voted for Bush, I was fully aware that the religious right would see his victory as a ticket to spread and enforce their dogma at will. I am
about as anti-religion as you can get and am actually counting on the left to counter the worst of the likely abuses. They are dropping the ball on
that task though, with letting this Terry Schiavo thing even get to Congress. Bad. Just Bad.

This is like Christians saying the abortion clinic bombers are the Atheist community's responsibility to deal with.

The reason this is even a problem is your whackos are your problem to deal with, and you aren't doing your job. In fact, you pander to
them. You let them dominate the conversations and debate, and sit back and grin waiting for the vote to come in, then can't figure out why your party
is full of nutjobs after each election.

All things considered the formal Democractic Party does a damn good job keeping the fringe Commies and eco-terrorists at bay and out of legislation
despite the right's ever-present and irrelevant hyper focus on just the extremists of the left as being representative of the left, which they
are NOT.

But your team drops the ball before you ever get it. You bend over for every whacko fringe wedge element that can vote, then say and do nothing while
they run your party. Your party is run by extremists. The Reverend Moon has more say than the real average American.

And that's not the left's fault, nor is it our problem to deal with as you claim you'd like. It's your fault Ambient and the fault of every other
sell out moderate Republican that sits on the sidelines and prays for the best. Deal with your demons. We'll deal with ours.

I'm sick of the passive moderates and "California Republicans" being called RINOS by their own party too, but grow some balls you wusses. Take your
party back, shout down the religious right or die on the vine.

You did this to yourselves. And "the left" isn't here to save your lazy wedge pandering asses. We're here to beat your wacko run party out of
power, not save it. Good God man, have you totally lost your senses and just given up to turn to us to fix your problem?

Understand that and you'll understand why you've lost control and might just realize what you need to do.

I'm specificaly talking about fixing it here. Get the extremists out of both parties. Take control. Everyone fix their own party. The moderates in
each really aren't divided at all as they actually represent mainstream America based on just about any issue poll you take.

Originally posted by eaglewingz
Just noticing that "your side" are called extremists, eco-terrorists, and fringe commies. The "other side" are called nutjobs and whackos.

Seems like the buzzwords are heavily weighted in one direction.

'cause a lot of people would consider eco-terrorists and fringe commies "whackos"

Of course they're whackos. Leftist whackos.

Should I call the right's nutjobs what they specifically are to be "fair" here: Dogmatic Authoritarian Theocrats?

Whackos, nutjobs...whatever. Look at my point, not my language.

I'm specifically not being PC here because that's part of the problem in this situation. Neither I nor the left in general has to respect or pander
to the opinon of some commie whacko minority anymore than I do (or the right should) some theocratic whacko minorty that wants to do things America
doesn't want.

And the problem is the right does pander to it's whacko minorities and turns over the keys. Deal with them, don't dance with them.

This is the result of wedge politics. A wedge party of extremists is not a "majority" opinon on anything no matter how many single issue extremists
you slap together under one umbrella.

If Ambient wasn't complaining about the extremists in his party and complaining that the left wasn't dealing with them properly I wouldn't
have even taken the time to respond here.

The "divide" to which I assume you think my language contributes is actually quite a thought out effort on my part to the opposite intent. See my
last 30 to 50 posts on the matter all over the board.

Extremists need to be told and shown they're extremists. By polls. By America. By moderates. By their own party. Because as it stands they
have no idea how far outside the mainstream they really are. And both fringe and now mainstream media reinforces their denial of reality at every
outlet they seek. And they are "the divide" to which we find ourselves suddenly so concerned in America. A fake sideshow of whacko nutjob fringe
elements yelling at each other with no idea how unrepresentative they are of anything but whackos and nutjobs.

Ambient, I hope you come back to discuss this because most moderates remain silent on these things.

What of all this Schiavo nonsese? Are you going to let them get away with it?

Your party leaders write memos on how to politicize
human suffering and "excite" the pro-life extremists then DeLay just goes on ABC and denies they did it and calls it "disgusting" but you KNOW
they did?

Why do you let them get away with it? I can't stop your party. You can.

Does it warm your cockles to hear Democrats upholding the will of the majority of Americans called "obstructionists" for fighting the extremist
tyranny you yourself hate within your own party?

It's all related. RINOS need to stand up and let the extremists know THEY are the RINOS. And you need to back us "obstructionists" or suffer the
conqsequences like the rest of America. This is ridiculous.

All things considered the formal Democractic Party does a damn good job keeping the fringe Commies and eco-terrorists at bay and out of legislation
despite the right's ever-present and irrelevant hyper focus on just the extremists of the left as being representative of the left, which they
are NOT.

The problem RANT, is that many don't see it that way.

Look at the last presidential election - Kerry was one of THE most liberal voting senators in all of congress. He voted more liberally then Kennedy
even.

Thats part of the reason the Democrats lost. He was a true liberals liberal, and his voting record proves it. He wasn't anything close to moderate,
though he did his best to come off as one.

Now look at the frontrunner for 2008 - Clinton.

She is another that a LOT of people (and not just hyperconservatives) believe to be a super liberal. Her voting backs that up as well.

The point is, it goes both ways. In fact, I would argue that the major players on the Republican side are far more moderate then on the Democrats. Of
course, both sides will say that.

Personally, I am very conservative, but dissagree with the Republicans on some issues such as abortion. This is not to say that I condone abortion, I
just think legally the government has no right to get involved in it. However, politics is ALL about compromises. You have to pick who you think will
do more good then harm, and there will ALWAYS be members who are more extreme then others.

I'll take tort reform, SS reform, a no BS foriegn policy, pro-gun laws and a strong military over pro-abortion laws, socialistic spending programs
and a weak foriegn policy any day of the week. And likewise, you would take pro-abortion laws, strong social programs, good relation foriegn policy,
and a well managed military over what ever pros you might see on the Republican ticket.

Originally posted by KINGTIGER1
Nice liberal talking points. Ifi gnorance is bliss, you are one happy guy.

Comparing Schiavo to Sun Hudson is truly retarted. Schiavo's parents have the money and are willing to assume responsibility for Terry. Sun Hudsons
mother had no way of paying for life support. If she had money, like schiavo's parents then she could have continued life support. No body is
responsible for somebody's medical needs.

Tort reform is ABSOLUTELY NECCESSARY. Trial lawyers are making millions of dollars (John edwards) feeding off of their victims. Many doctors
can't even practice medicine due to scumbag lawyers. How many lives are lost because doctors discontinue their practice? Nobody should have to pay
for the medical treatment of others. That is that.

So, in the 1st World & in the LEADER OF THE 1st WORLD NATION, life is soley predicated on ones ability to pay for it?
Trial lawyers who pursue frivalous cases have already had severe curtailing of their ability to do so. Of those who actually do get those types of
cases to be deliberated on & win, the "millions" won by them is a fractional percentage of both legitimate case awards and in the opposite
direction, the billions made by negligent companies shielded from payment.
This argument of yours is in the same vein as Saddam being a "clear & present danger" menacing Main St. USA, back 3 years ago.

I give castigation of Republicans & Democrats alike, yet you offer up mindless, refuted and overall banal fecal nuggets regurgitated from talking
points not even remotely original or momentarily pondered by you?
Pitiful

Originally posted by Bout Time
Are the Republicans who jetted back to Washington this weekend "to save Terri" not the same politicians who recently voted as a rock-solid bloc to
gut the Medicaid funding that helps pay for catastrophic medical costs incurred by the unfortunate thousands who find themselves in a similar
situation? Did they not overwhelmingly pass a devastating bankruptcy bill that will make it impossible for families who lose their life savings
to ever get back on their feet? Were they not the ones who vowed to enact tort reform that would wipe out the exact same kind of malpractice
claims that have thus kept Schiavo alive!?

Yes, the Republicans are hypocrites. But, so are the Democrats. The same Democrats who have spent their political careers claiming to fight for those
who are helpless, powerless, and in need of protection, have turned their back on this young woman. They just don't care if this woman lives or dies;
they just consider this an oppoturnity to make a political point.

Everyone here should ask themselves this question: "All politics aside, doesn't this woman have a right to live?"

The U.S. Constitution provides rights to its citizens, and these rights cannot be removed without due process. And the right to life is the most
obvious right of all! Terri Schiavo has not been convicted of a capital crime, or sentenced to death by a jury of her peers. Yet here she is, facing a
death penalty, and a last minute appeal, as if she were a convicted felon. Worst of all, she has absolutely no way to defend herself, either
physically or legally.

Originally posted by Thomas Sowell
If the tragic case of Terri Schiavo shows nothing else, it shows how easily "the right to die" can become the right to kill. It is hard to believe
that anyone, regardless of their position on euthanasia, would have chosen the agony of starvation and dehydration as the way to end someone's
life.

A New York Times headline on March 20th tried to assure us: "Experts Say Ending Feeding Can Lead to a Gentle Death" but you can find experts to say
anything. In a December 2, 2002 story in the same New York Times, people starving in India were reported as dying, "often clutching pained
stomachs."

No murderer would be allowed to be killed this way, which would almost certainly be declared "cruel and unusual punishment," in violation of the
Constitution, by virtually any court.

Terri Schiavo's only crime is that she has become an inconvenience -- and is caught in the merciless machinery of the law.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.